27 years ago Nick Meyer’s Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, set the standard for Star Trek movies that is still the pinnacle today. That began a decade long relationship for Meyer with the franchise, which he writes about in his new memoir "The View From the Bridge: Memories of Star Trek and a Life in Hollywood." See below for our review

The View From the Bridge: Memories of Star Trek and a Life in Hollywood by Nicholas Meyer
Viking Press – Hardcover

Most any Star Trek fan knows the name Nicholas Meyer. He was, in the early 1980s, a young director/writer whose balance of respect for Star Trek’s characters and disavowance for literally everything else from the franchise (from its costumes to the clean, perfect utopian future heralded by Gene Roddenberry) was a key ingredient in the revival of Star Trek. He had no apotheosis for Star Trek, yet became one of its most important auteurs. It is easy to forget how radically different Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan was in music, costuming, set design, language, and themes. Yet at its heart, the characters were true and honest to what makes Star Trek great. It is arguable that Meyer is a main reason Star Trek survives to this day. Along with Michael Piller and Harve Bennett, Meyer belongs to the short list of those who followed in the footsteps of Gene Roddenberry to make Star Trek workable for subsequent generations. This is why his memoir, whose title "The View From the Bridge: Memories of Star Trek and Life in Hollywood" is a riff from the famous Arthur Miller play, is essential reading for any Star Trek and movie fan. The book chronicles Meyer’s experiences in Hollywood, beginning with his comedic telling of being a publicist for films during the 1970s (hilarious and ridiculous corporate decisions abound), all the way to his latest Teddy Roosevelt biopic screenplay. Along the way, there are many thoughtful and controversial commentaries about politics, actors, filmmaking, limitations of artists and art, and of course Star Trek.

For the passionate Trekkie who has listened to Meyer’s excellent commentaries on the Star Trek films or read interviews, there are many good details here that Meyer hasn’t really talked about before. Even the most devoted behind the scenes aficionado will learn new details. For example, Meyer provides all kinds of information on the making of both Star Trek II and Star Trek VI, as he was most intimately involved with these films. There is information about narrative design (including arbitration of credit and battles with Roddenberry), why James Horner and Cliff Eidelman were chosen as composers, the sets, and general musings about the history and philosophy of Star Trek. His discussion of directing Ricardo Montalban is both moving and revealing (as is his excellent tribute to Montalban on the Blu Ray versions of Star Trek II if you haven’t seen it yet). Reading Meyer’s book in 2009, when another young director/writer JJ Abrams, with his own naivety towards Star Trek, has helped reinvigorate the franchise adds to the enjoyment because the active mind will see the same themes of 1982 (TWOK) repeated again in ST09.

Meyer refuses to hold audience’s hands, and his argument in the book (oft repeated in interviews) is that the artist’s interpretation of their art is but a voice. The audience’s interpretation of the film or book is equally valid. Therefore, readers shouldn’t expect to get a detailed discussion of what Khan’s single glove means (although Meyer does give a joke explanation). Instead, learning about Meyer’s past experiences helps readers to appreciate why he may have made certain choices during his Star Trek days. For example, Meyer has had a lifetime affinity for both Horatio Hornblower and Disney’s 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea. Star Trek II and VI nautical feeling (from naval language to Horner’s music) has some roots in these personal fascinations. He is an avid Sherlock Holmes and HG Wells fans, something that has influenced both his novels and films (and whose themes resound in Star Trek VI especially with both its obsessions about time (Wells would appreciate "Kronos," the ever present Enterprise bridge clock, the race to Khitomer, the notions of retirement) and its mystery themes (even indirectly referencing Sir Arthur Conan Doyle as an ancestor of Spock)). Of course, none of these connections are explicit in the book which is why it is enjoyable, because Meyer doesn’t make all the connections for the readers. He trusts the audience to make its own decrees. That the book is structured as telling Meyer’s life history "Part 1:Pre Trek", "Part 2: Trek" and "Part 3: Post Trek" reveals both the importance of Star Trek on his public image and professional experiences, and how his past affected his time with Star Trek.

It is refreshing to read a Star Trek biography that doesn’t "talk trash" as so many of those from the casts have (although not every Star Trek experience with Roddenberry, Leonard Nimoy, William Shatner, or the studio were pleasant and Meyer does provide his version of events). Indeed, Meyer speaks candidly about his limitations as a director and writer. He mentions how he is too verbal and thinks in words not images (a real struggle for a film director). His film scripts often need entire sections removed because a single moment on film could be as effective as pages of dialog and it has taken him time to learn this. In both the book and the TWOK Blu-Ray commentary with Manny Coto, Meyer discusses the idea that while he is often praised for the economical camera movements in Star Trek II, it was really the result of his inabilities, not his abilities and accidental art. Meyer’s book shares secrets such as it was producer Robert Salin who thought of and designed Kirk’s dramatic first appearance in Star Trek II. Meyer’s original version was mundane and he is willing to give credit where credit is due.

There is also much to enjoy here for the newer Star Trek fans or for those who just enjoy a good film biography. Meyer has a special place in film history because of Star Trek and non-Star Trek experiences. There are many cool "did you know" moments (such as his directing the famous television movie The Day After, writing scripts for films such as Sommersby, why he is distraught with the alterations made to his screenplay for The Odyssey, and what is like to direct Tom Hanks and John Candy in Volunteers (which is also the film where Rita Wilson and Hanks met). This is an intelligent, often funny, sometimes academic and erudite, and occasionally heart breaking biography. There are some sad moments, especially when Meyer describes losing his wife in 1992 to breast cancer, left to care for his two daughters and there are some jubilant moments, such as the sale of his first book. All in all, there are good lessons about Star Trek, filmmaking, writing, and occasionally even about life.

Read most of it this week, and it really is excellent stuff. Highly recommended for all Trek fans.

However, there are a few factual errors here & there that a good proofreader really should have caught (At one point Meyer refers to TOS as having 66 episodes…). Nothing that really interfered with my enjoyment of the book, but noticeable nonetheless. Hopefully the errors will get fixed in the paperback edition.

Mr Meyer might think in words rather than images, but some of his Wrath of Khan images are among my very favorite in the series. Perhaps my favorite sequence of all the Trek films is the “Genesis Countdown” scene where each shot is a slow zoom in on each character as they say their lines. The effect really heightens the tension of the scene and works perfectly with the score.

#7 Daoud one question, how come you say there is 66 episodes and since 1984 Paramount has been marketing the 79 TOS episode DVD set, and before that since the 70’s there has been VHS. I first herd of Betamax tapes in 1975 which at the time cost almost a weeks pay for one episode.

And also on STARTREK [dot] COM they have 79 episodes also listed and their air dates. And this same info is on many other Trek based site.

And until JJ Abrams started Star Trek Movie #11, Nick Meyer was the biggest name in Star Trek Movie world. And he was very good if not great at his work. But them Meyer might be seen by today’s groupies as of the Shatner era crowd. But I still think if he was given the bank funds he can make a Star Trek Movie that would live up to JJ’s efforts.

Meyer’s candor and frankness about Trek was what made his work with the franchise so successful. Probably the very best thing he had going for him as he took the Wrath of Khan project was the fact he had *no* Trek “history” of his own to overcome.

I saw Meyer a couple years back when he did a Q&A for the Director’s Cut Trek VI DVD. Fascinating speaker. Took me a few minutes to figure out why he autographed it “Nicholas Meyer, BSI”, but it’s all elementary! Thanks for the heads up about Book Passage tomorrow. I might have missed it if it weren’t for this site.

I posted some of this in another thread but it fits better here. I picked up the book over the weekend and am almost finished (only need to read the post Trek segment).

Meyer has a very conversational and self-deprecating style that makes the text accessible and keeps the reader interested in the narration.

In reading his very lengthy chapter on TWOK, its amazing just how little he knew or cared about Trek when he took on the job. One gets the impression that he was doing it more from instinct and that any similarities to past Trek were more coincidence or serendipity rather than the result of careful planning.

His chapter on TUC is also a good summation of the trials endured to get that movie to the screen and how so many elements had to line up just right to make it happen; I’d forgotten just how much I’d hated the suits and bean-counters at Paramount from that era.

For the hardcore Trek fan, there really isn’t that new much info in the book that hasn’t been discussed before in other books and nitpickers beware as he does get some facts wrong (67 episodes?) but in spite of that it has still been a good read and I never realized that he had been involved in some of the other movies mentioned in the piece.

Definitely worth a read and I can’t help but wonder if he’d be interested in a collaboration with this new Trek crew.

Spockish: 1966. With “66 episodes” he might have been referring to ’66, the original season of Star Trek, the first season, which began in 1966. R.I.F.!

We all know damn well how many episodes there are. I can understand if Meyer refers to the ’66 episodes of Trek being the best. Those *15* episodes were all gems, and even if Trek had only been those eps and cancelled before January 1, 1967, it still would have been a superb oeuvre.

I look forward to reading the book and insight into the production of several of the Trek movies. Unfortunately, I do not share the view that Meyer singlehandedly “saved the franchise.” Sure, he took it into a different direction but to save something denotes the fact that the prior effort, in this case The Motion Picture, was a total and complete disaster, which it was not.

So, lets not color history by looking backward with fogged up glasses shall we?

to #21, sorry for the miss understanding, when I first read your posting in #7 I was being bugged by my cat that wanted attention. She loves rubbing up against my face and brushing her big bushy tail in my face. I guess she has learned how to get attention in return and is a good distractor.

I think TOS first aired on Sept. 14th, 1966, the first one I saw was in the fall of 1968, called Omega Glory. And in the 70’s watched the series daily until it stopped airing on either of the two channels it was on at diffrent times. The channels were KOA/KCNC ch#4 and KWGN ch#2. KCNC or at the time was labeled KOA the first 3 years from 73 to 76 the KWGN every year after. It also had TNG & DSN then UPN started in 95 and had Voyager and Enterprise.

I wonder if there ever will be a Star Trek Channel in the Net and air all the time one of the 636 shows or movies for free with out the cutting of time. Like now the TOSe episodes are only 36 minutes and they were made as 50 to 48 minutes long. They can still have TV ads but need to show full shows and not be limited to hour segments that TV is set on.

In the review above, it mentions the REVELATION of Sallin designing Kirk’s intro, but that’s not really giving away credit, because Meyer has always said he had Kirk outside in the hall reading before it got changed. So he never took credit for it before (I thought it was from Minor’s boards myself.)

If this is just MeyerTrek101 for those who missed some earlier articles, then is it just a cash-in, or is there any value in it for those of us who have read all that came before?

I read the book last night, and honestly I think that your money is better spent getting the Trek DVDs and listening to Mr. Meyer’s commentary.

Most of what he relates in the book I’ve read somewhere before, and the errors in the book don’t reflect well on Mr. Meyer’s memory – he states that ILM was “across the Bay from San Francisco, in San Mateo” (It was north of SF, in San Rafael – San Mateo is 20 – 25 miles south of SF on the Peninsula), that ” the Genesis Device Explosion was filmed at Candlestick Park” (Which was an outdoor baseball/football stadium without a roof – the explosion was filmed indoors at the Cow Palace, a few miles away from Candlestick).

I thought that the most interesting parts of the book were the commentaries that he makes at the end of the chapters about the Trek films, reflecting about those experiences from today’s perspective.

That comment is about as friendly as wearing a ‘I love G.W. Bush T-shirt at a Anti War Convention’.

Maybe we’ll make you go to a NAR Convention wearing a poster saying ‘Guns can only be used, owned, or bought by government’

It may be true that ‘A New Hope’ added in moving Paramount’s money from the future series of ‘Star Trek Phase Two’ in the winter of 1977 to a movie which became ST:TMP. But Star Wars is not the only thing in Star Wars, just as Star Trek is not either. I think that I have just as valid a statement as saying 2001 is more of saving Sci-Fi movies after Planet of the Apes movies may have almost stopped Good budgeted Sci-Fi moves.

I know 2001 came out between Apes#1 & Apes#2 and carried on until 1973 and I’ll guess the 2001 movie was no longer at the movies, and the TV series was in 73&74, but all that stuff would create many more disagreements.

Uh, folks, ONE MORE TIME … SW came out as the trek movie that Kaufmann was going to do — and already had a start date! — got CANCELLED. Phase II came about AFTER SW released, and was then abandoned months later.

TREK as a feature was going to happen whether or not SW happened, but if Par was smart, they’d have gotten their act together and gotten it out there BEFORE SW and really cleaned up like no trek ever has … the demand was there, just no product.

#29 Fascinating point… Meyer’s tone used in TWOK and TUC is exactly the type of direction that Star Trek (Mark) 2 (use the digit, not the Roman) should take! After all, Vulcan has been destroyed. The tone should take a lesson from nuBSG (but not too much lesson!) and be a bit more somber and less lens-flare-flashy. It would “fit”.

The NERO I incident of 2233 and NERO II incident of 2258 should together have seriously altered the complexion of the fleet again. Perhaps to something more “recognizable”? If the 2233 incident altered the timeline, perhaps the denouement of Nero in 2258 alters it again back towards how we saw 2266 previously. In any case… bringing in Meyer is a great option for JJ if he chooses to focus on directing M:I:IV.

Also, Meyer is great with ship pieces, which an Axanar-focused story with the Laurentian system gathered fleet led by Garth; a Romulan wing led by The Commander Who Looketh Like Sarek (yep, cast Ben Cross ;); in a “war triangle” with the Klingons led by Kor or Kang would be. And of course you know that Ambassador Fox is the one who made the whole mess….

@24, Spockish – Star Trek first aired on September 8, 1966 (my dad’s birthday – that’s how I know), after being pushed up a week from September 15 (there is an NBC Star Trek promo on YouTube with that date on it).

Fascinating. I remember reading in Cinefantastique, circa 1991/92, that the Rura Penthe scenes were originally supposed to include some of the guest characters from TOS. I always wondered who they considered.

@22 – ” Unfortunately, I do not share the view that Meyer singlehandedly “saved the franchise.”

I didn’t think this was subject to debate anymore?

From Meyer’s and Bennett’s own words in the DVD Director’s Cut, Bennett was asked “can you make a better movie, and make it for less than 45 million (blanking) dollars?” And he, Meyer, and even Nimoy were working the movie “as if this was the end of Star Trek…”

…and when Meyer came on board, he changed EVERYTHING he could about the appearance of the film…costumes, music, theming, lighting, you name it, he changed it – everything short of the Enterprise herself.

It wasn’t until they started screening the movie that they realized they had a potential hit, and started thinking about a sequel.

If going from “this is the last movie” to “let’s do a sequel” isn’t saving the franchise, bless me if I know what is…

#7 Daoud: Flipping through my copy again, I cannot find the exact page where Meyer refers to the number of TOS episodes. Your interpretation hadn’t occured to me, but it sounds plausible. Maybe this was just as simple as a missing apostrophe. :)

@43 You obviously were not alive when TMP first came out or obviously were not aware of things going on at the time.

Gene Roddenberry was asked by the studio for sequel ideas even BEFORE the movie was released. Paramount knew it had a success at the time, so why do people now refer to that period in time as the end (beginning and end). Read Susan Sackett’s book on the Making of TMP and you will find in the last chapter about the future of Trek. I even remember watching Good Morning America and a Rona Barrett report, in Jan of ’80, where her inside sources indicated that Paramount was indeed planning on a sequel because of the success of the first movie. To some it was not the Star Wars that it was hyped to be, but this is not Star Wars.

Again, we have an example of people picking up pieces and bits of information from a source or two, maybe five, but still getting it wrong.

Do not get me wrong, I enjoy ST II as much as everyone, but due to the cheapness of which the film was made (remember this was made by Paramount’s TV Division), it perpetuates the joke that the movies are extended tv episodes. Shatner didn’t even cry when Spock died. His best friend! I don’t know about you but if my best friend died, I would cry. Its one of a few things that bothers me everytime I see that movie. Shatner gave the best performance of his career in STIII. You Klingon bastards!!!! … :D

@47: Your mileage may vary — I thought Kirk struggling to keep it together over the eulogy, and his voice catching as he said “.. his was the most… human” was far more affecting and effective than if hed been a sobbing wreck.

This sounds like an interesting read. I really enjoyed Meyer’s DVD commentary on TWOK, but he’s a bit dry to listen to. Meyer in book form sounds ideal.

48. CarlG: ‘Your mileage may vary — I thought Kirk struggling to keep it together over the eulogy, and his voice catching as he said “.. his was the most… human” was far more affecting and effective than if hed been a sobbing wreck.’

Agreed: Kirk had too much dignity to blub and if he had, he knew that wherever Spock was, he would have been appalled. Kirk breaking down over the death of his son was more understandable.

47. Ho Hum De Dum Part II: ‘Read Susan Sackett’s book on the Making of TMP and you will find in the last chapter about the future of Trek.’

Susan Sackett is hardly an unbiased source and claiming there are sequels in the pipeline in a ‘Making of . . .’ book is hardly unusual, even if it’s untrue!

I should definitely pick this up. The review was pretty good, but I strongly disagree with the brief comparison between Meyer and JJ Abrams. I just don’t see them as being in the same league. I think Meyer handled the mythos and dynamics of Trek way better than Abrams did.

The irony to this statement is that when you read the book, you’ll quickly realize that Meyer knew next to NOTHING about Trek’s mythos or the dynamics between the characters. By way of preparation, he only saw Space Seed once, TMP once and a smattering of episodes. By his own admission, he simply did not get the show, especially back in 1982, and actually went out of his way to change as much as he could – costumes, set decorations, lighting, etc. He would have gone further if he had the budget and he even changed the Federation from Roddenberry’s utopian peace-keeping force to a quasi-militaristic one. He never bought into Roddenberry’s optimistic, evolved view of future man, and even got into a heated argument about it with Roddenberry during the making of TUC.

I must also confess, while I find TWOK to be an enjoyable “B” movie kind of experience, it also flies in the face of Trek’s core themes and to my way of thinking it is a real betrayal of the spirit of the episode that inspired it. Space Seed had that title for a reason: rather than punish Khan and his people, Kirk deposited them on a virgin planet in the hopes that focusing their energies on taming that world would make them better people. He wasn’t punishing Khan, he was giving him exactly what he wanted. Spock even intones that it would be interesting to return to that world in 100 years and see what had sprung from the seed they had planted. Bennett and Meyer took that hopeful concept, so in keeping with Trek’s optimistic vision, and threw it in the meat grinder, twisting it and contorting it into an action vehicle, and to me that felt like something of a waste.

Like I said, its an entertaining movie, and the late Ricardo Montalban give an amazing performance, but don’t be telling me its great Star Trek because quite frankly, it holds little in common with the best of Trek’s ideals.

By contrast, Abrams seemed to get and embraced the show’s innate hopefulness and optimism and his Federation (called a humanitarian armada by Pike at one point) is very much a return to the classic Trek ideals.

Attended the first Meyer appearance at Book Passage in Corte Madera last night. An insightful reading from the book regarding the production of TIME AFTER TIME, and an engaging Q&A after. Luckily, it was all recorded and am told it will be posted online sometime in the next 7-10 days. I’ll let Anthony know when it becomes available and maybe he can link to it…

Oh, only a few Trek items came up; Meyer related how little he knew about the franchise prior to his participation in STTWOK, a poignant recollection of the filming of Spock’s death scene, and a brief mention that he was never asked by the Berman regime to participate in any Trek productions after STVI.

…oh, and one other thing! STVI composer Cliff Eidelman has approached Meyer about producing an UNDISCOVERED COUNTRY opera! Meyer opined, “They do call them ‘space operas’ after all!” Not sure if it’ll ever fly, but Meyer is a tremendous opera aficionado and could probably whip up a great libretto.

I knew several years ago when the Collector’s Edition DVD for “Wrath of Khan” came out that Meyer knew nothing about Trek going in. The first thing he said to the person trying to get him to come on board said something to the effect of, “Is that the one with the guy who has the pointed ears?” Yeah, he made a lot of on-set aficionados crazy by putting a “No Smoking” sign on the bridge and whatnot, but I still stand by my statement. “The Wrath of Khan” isn’t my favorite Trek movie, but it’s still one of the better installments because it incorporates timeless influences such as Horatio Hornblower, “Moby Dick”, and even “A Tale of Two Cities” into the narrative. I think he (and Sowards to some degree) didn’t lose sight of what made the characters click, and that’s what made a B-level picture (in terms of budget) that much better. The dialogue was good and the behavior of the characters was maintained yet stretched to accomodate the stakes of the story (aging, death, revenge, etc.). “The Undiscovered Country” was spectacular because it was full of political intrigue and had some timeless influences of its own (Shakespeare references galore). It wasn’t just some mindless action film.

While Abrams may have understood the optimism of Trek, I frankly didn’t see that in the new film. I saw a lot of Star Wars in there, and I found the majority of the characters to be loathsome, which desensitized me to what was happening on screen. Of course, that’s my opinion and I know a lot of people don’t agree with me on that one because I think characters should always come first. I just think Meyer brought his A-game to those movies in much better way.

@48 and @49. Are we not operating on all thrusters? :) The eulogy is fine. This was after the tragic event of having your best friend or ‘brother’ die in front of you. So of course, you are more collected and in control. I am talking about the engine room scene as he witnesses Spock slowly dying, with his skin charred from the radiation burns..blind, barely walking. Then the final parting words. Yes, a cry was warranted …demanded, after that. Kirk knew Spock for the better part of what..20 plus years of service together? They were more than family. In III, he barely knew David before he was murdered, yet he cried. Sorry, it was a bad choice to not have directed a good cry scene. Just having Kirk, utter no and look to the camera with that look of numbness just doesn’t cut it. It never has for the last 26 or so years and it never will.

Again @ 49 “Susan Sackett is hardly an unbiased source and claiming there are sequels in the pipeline in a ‘Making of . . .’ book is hardly unusual, even if it’s untrue!”

Sackett was Roddenberry’s PA since TOS. Her TMP book was documentary and not a personal account of what happened. What bias?? Are you dismissing the other sources of the sequel discussion pre and post release of ’79 also? Were you alive then? Probably not. Do you also believe man landed on the moon in ’69? Or do you believe it was an elaborate special effects extravaganza funded by the taxpayer and produced by NASA? :)

Sackett’s account misrepresented ALL KINDS of things. She was in contact throughout with Brick Price, who did most of the props. Even so, in the book, she interviews Dick Rubin, the prop master, as if he has something to do with them besides take them out of a box and give them to the actors.

That book has got all sorts of spin on it, and plenty of questionable info as well.

She even makes the Grace lee Whitney dress as a secretary bit sound like everybody thought it was funny, when it was anything but.

51,
God knows what kind of hopefulness you’re talking about with TheAbramsThing. They blow up planets and practice luddite versions of science building starships on ground. If Meyer had had more money, he would have built the bridge to look like the NOSTROMO (he actually told me that), not put the ship up in an earthbound dockyard. Meyer is no scifi guru, but he is also not usually an imbicile.

[…] This book looks like a winner. Nicholas Meyer who is probably best known for directing and helping write, “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan” along with work on Trek 4 and back directing Trek 6 has a new book out. Lots of great info about working on the films and interactions with the studio, actors, and everyone involved with these productions. It is out now and can be ordered from Amazon.com HERE. I can’t wait to read this book as it looks to be a great source of information on these films and what went into making them. A very nice review and more details about the book HERE. […]

‘Sorry, it was a bad choice to not have directed a good cry scene. Just having Kirk, utter no and look to the camera with that look of numbness just doesn’t cut it.’

Only if you only like soap operatic garbage and all that Counsellor Troi emotional cripple nonsense. ‘No’ was all we needed from Kirk. It spoke far more volumes than seeing a seasoned starship commander lose his dignity in front of his officers and a bunch of cadets!

‘Sackett was Roddenberry’s PA since TOS. Her TMP book was documentary and not a personal account of what happened. What bias?’

On the money ! Iswhat Mayer did for trek o great character driven stories. All true to their emotions with given consaquences. Yes kirk cried at spocks death. He huddled at that reactor ,like ahelples child. At the sercice, choked on tears. MMeyer saved trek. But where was he when needed in making TMP? And TNG? He would have ruled!

@60 Obviously you missed the point. So yes, you have a thruster or two misfiring. :)

“Only if you only like soap operatic garbage and all that Counsellor Troi emotional cripple nonsense. ‘No’ was all we needed from Kirk. It spoke far more volumes than seeing a seasoned starship commander lose his dignity in front of his officers and a bunch of cadets!”

Why is it bad to show emotion? Especially at such a strongly dramatic moment as the death of your best friend or as Kirk would put it later, brother. I did not want to use the word emotional cripple but if thats how you describe the normal grieving process when someone close dies, and if that is what you can relate to, then perhaps you describe yourself. Counselor Troi nonsense? I think it is enlightenment. Why bottle up such a moment and keep it inside? People who do bottle up emotions later end up exploding it out later.

Re: Sackett, there were other sources for the discussion of a sequel at the time the movie came out and after. Its obvious you weren’t alive at the time or are misinformed. So please do not perpetuate false information when you are not willing to acknowledge those who know a little more than you do, or are willing to admit. The notion that the first movie was a failure and the lack of sequel discussion is not true. It broke box office records for its time during its opening and accounting for inflation, was the highest grossing Trek movie of all time up until the new movie opened.

@61 “MMeyer saved trek. But where was he when needed in making TMP? And TNG? He would have ruled!”

Please do not bestow the Messiah mantle on Meyer that he does not deserve. He deserves credit for making a wonderful and entertaining movie and contributing to the success of Treks 4 and 6. This does not mean the entire franchise was “saved” by him. Sorry. *BUZZER* Wrong. Very wrong.

Looking forward to Meyer’s recollection of THE DAY AFTER. A compelling film that brings the unthinkable to life–the initial experience of watching it in 1983 was shattering. Further viewings reveal previously hidden depths of emotion, which climax in the “attack sequence” which is one of the most powerful 5-10 minutes I have ever seen in a movie.

I am a Star Trek fan going back to the original series in the late sixties. I loved the 2nd Star Trek movie “The Wrath of Khan”, so I was initially excited to see a book of this nature at my local bookstore.
I read the inner and back covers, and bought the book. The author’s note was excellent. There are few authors who are able to make this section of the book interesting. Steven King is another one.
I began reading the prologue, “A Funeral”. I got as far as the second to last paragraph where Meyer writes, “a producer whose list of great movies is probably as long as George W. Bush’s war crimes”.
I stopped right there and threw the thing in the trash. I thought I was buying a book that would give me some insight into my favorite Star Trek movie, not one that exposes the author’s political clap trap.
I’m only glad that the book was in the disount bin and only cost me $3.97.